[Etherboot-developers] Re: [Etherboot-users] Looking in all the wrong places

[<ke...@us...>]

>Ken for 5.2 would it make sense to always require a non-null filename?
>In most cases this would remove the need for REQUIRE_VCI_ETHERBOOT,
>and the setup is some simpler.

Wait, I think I understand what you're trying to say. You mean take the
absence of a filename (or perhaps of a useful IP also) to indicate a
DHCP server we should ignore and wait for another reply from a DHCP
server we control. Our DHCP server would still have to be careful not to
assign IPs to clients we don't care about, but this can be done by
looking for the Vendor Indentifier of Etherboot which is always sent or
by using MAC addresses. That sounds reasonable.  I think the fallback to
/tftpboot/kernel is marginally useful anyway.  What is the experience of
other developers? If it's a good idea, it can even go into 5.0.7.